• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should US Presidential Candicates Be Tested?

Should US Presidential Candidates Be Tested?

  • Yes

    Votes: 1 4.3%

  • No

    Votes: 22 95.7%
  • Total voters
    23
MildSteel said:
Those are reasons why we should test people. At least we would know we were getting someone who is knowledgeable.
Click to expand...

Do you really think what a candidate scores on a test will make a difference to the voters? Besides it would take a constitutional amendment to change the qualifications. That stands less of a chance of a snow ball surviving in hell.
 
MildSteel said:
I think it's time to come up with some more stringent requirements for someone to be President of the United States. Right now we only require that a person be a minimum age and be born in the US. We need a little more than that for such an important office. Presidential candidates should be required to take a test to make sure that they have at least a basic understanding of some of the major issues and are able to give some sort of decent analysis of the current major points of tension in foreign policy.

What do you think, is it time for US Presidential candidates to be tested?
Click to expand...

I sort of agree with your idea. Not a graded test exactly, but a form that the candidate would have to fill out that lists their experience and their positions on important issues. Like a resume basically.

And it shouldn't just be the president either, it should be for anyone running for any public office in the country.

It would make being an informed voter so much easier.
 
Who would make this "test"? How are you gonna make sure its not biased? Who grades them?
 
I'm more for the voter having to pass a test. It irks me to no end that a dumbass from Hicktown, who still thinks the world is flat, has a vote that counts as much as mine.
 
Not a bad idea.

But I don't think the test would mean much as the candidates would just be coached for days before hand (like they are before debates).

I just don't think it would say anything.

A far better test, IMO, would be to get them loaded up with a 'truth drug' (like sodium thiopental) and then ask them what they REALLY think about the major issues...then you might begin to understand what they really think and know.
 
MildSteel said:
While the campaigns and elections are a test, candidates should be required to demonstrate that they have a command of the understanding of the issues that they will be faced with when they assume office. I also disagree that good executives don't rely on their own knowledge and experience. Large successful corporations always select someone with at least some experience directing some crucial operation of a large firm.
Click to expand...

The bolded above is true and yet the voters elected Obama despite that lack of experience or even knowing what he could not do. What sells to the voting public is promises not any actual results. Romney had far more "credentials" which would pass a test but lacked the BS that wins elections. The voters did not want some "official" test board to limit their options,,based on reality, they wanted hope and change. ;)
 
DA60 said:
Not a bad idea.

But I don't think the test would mean much as the candidates would just be coached for days before hand (like they are before debates).

I just don't think it would say anything.

A far better test, IMO, would be to get them loaded up with a 'truth drug' (like sodium thiopental) and then ask them what they REALLY think about the major issues...then you might begin to understand what they really think and know.
Click to expand...

Screw Candid Camera. I want to watch Candid Congressman!
 
I voted no because I wouldnt want it to be in any legally binding way, but something they were challenged to (like debates)....that could be kind of cool and the people would still be able to decide for themselves.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
The bolded above is true and yet the voters elected Obama despite that lack of experience or even knowing what he could not do. What sells to the voting public is promises not any actual results. Romney had far more "credentials" which would pass a test but lacked the BS that wins elections. The voters did not want some "official" test board to limit their options,,based on reality, they wanted hope and change. ;)
Click to expand...

IMHO The fact that the masses pay more attention to promises than substance is all the more reason why we need to test candidates, so that the masses will at least elect someone who is knowledgeable.
 
Perotista said:
Do you really think what a candidate scores on a test will make a difference to the voters? Besides it would take a constitutional amendment to change the qualifications. That stands less of a chance of a snow ball surviving in hell.
Click to expand...

Regardless of whether it makes a difference to voters, at least we would be assured that we have a candidate in there that has some minimum knowledge about the affairs of the world.
 
molten_dragon said:
I sort of agree with your idea. Not a graded test exactly, but a form that the candidate would have to fill out that lists their experience and their positions on important issues. Like a resume basically.

And it shouldn't just be the president either, it should be for anyone running for any public office in the country.

It would make being an informed voter so much easier.
Click to expand...

That would be good, ALONG with a test.
 
MildSteel said:
That would be good, ALONG with a test.
Click to expand...

Who would have the authority to administer such a test? As it is now we can't even get anything that approaches a real debate in campaigns, as the ones who decide are the ones that don't want to do it.
 
radcen said:
Who would have the authority to administer such a test? As it is now we can't even get anything that approaches a real debate in campaigns, as the ones who decide are the ones that don't want to do it.
Click to expand...

The government if it was a law.
 
radcen said:
You mean the same government that passes laws to keep out third party threats and keep our options down to essentially the two primary parties... in other words, themselves? That government?
Click to expand...

Yep, that's the one.
 
Jesse Booth said:
If so, that might very well sink my boat in the upcoming 2034 elections. Seriously, it's like a quarantine zone down there.
Click to expand...

Jesse Booth said:
If that's your information threshold, you better thank me for not describing the coloration and texture. Yet.
Click to expand...

:2sick1::sick:

toilet_puke.jpg
 
Yuk!!! That was nasty!!!! EWWWW!
 
Kal'Stang said:
:2sick1::sick:

View attachment 67171307
Click to expand...

You should've quoted this post when you posted a picture of someone vomiting:

Jesse Booth said:
It's mostly a mottled greyish green, but there's some red pustules on it, and for some reason all the veins on it are now bright orange. As for the texture, it somehow feels slippery and gritty at the same time! How weird is that?

Fortunately, I lost all sensation in that area of my body about when the prickly purple stuff started growing on my scrotum. I was starting to think the pain would drive me insane!

Also, the smell of chlorine and pepperoni is constantly wafting up from down there. That might be the strangest symptom of all...
Click to expand...

In hindsight, I could have easily worked in some imagery to disgust your senses of taste and hearing as well. I'll do better next time I make a joke about my warped, disease-infested genitalia.
 
Jesse Booth said:
You should've quoted this post when you posted a picture of someone vomiting:



In hindsight, I could have easily worked in some imagery to disgust your senses of taste and hearing as well. I'll do better next time I make a joke about my warped, disease-infested genitalia.
Click to expand...

I hadn't gotten that far when I posted that.
 
Captain America said:
I'm more for the voter having to pass a test. It irks me to no end that a dumbass from Hicktown, who still thinks the world is flat, has a vote that counts as much as mine.
Click to expand...

The dumbass from Hicktown probably feels the same about your vote, which is what makes democracy so much fun and so damn good.
 
Considering there are precious few things that Americans come to a consensus agreement upon, I think this idea hasn't any merit going forward. Hell, the two parties can't even agree on who should ask questions during a Presidential debate - how are they going to agree on a testing mechanism?

Wouldn't be a bad idea, however, if there was some type of educational model or research vehicle for those who wish to enter politics at different levels. The more people know about government, how it functions, who does what, etc. the better off the electorate is and the better informed those interested in serving will be. We have such things here, but not nearly enough, in my view.
 
Drug tested, probably. Otherwise, no.
 
there is just one qualification that he must have, born in the USA or born as a US citizen.
 
Sure, but I get to decide what the correct answers are. Wonder how many Republicans will pass...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom